On 5/2/2013 10:17 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
This is global fix creep, but ...
:(
these macros are also found in the hotspot sources.
I would rewrite all the macros in the jdk to adopt the blessed style
do { ... } while(0)
and remove all comments in the jdk of the form
/* next token must be ; */
If you want a macro that does nothing at all, you should define it
do {} while (0)
instead of defining it to the empty string.
I am not following, could you be more explicit on how this applies to
-#define NULL_CHECK0(e) if ((e) == 0) { \
+#define NULL_CHECK_RV(e, rv) if ((e) == 0) { \
JLI_ReportErrorMessage(JNI_ERROR); \
- return 0; \
+ return rv; \
}
-#define NULL_CHECK(e) if ((e) == 0) { \
- JLI_ReportErrorMessage(JNI_ERROR); \
- return; \
- }
+#define NULL_CHECK0(e) NULL_CHECK_RV(e, 0)
+#define NULL_CHECK(e) NULL_CHECK_RV(e, )
+
I would also be inclined to change
== 0
to
== NULL
Yes will take care of this, as well as Alan suggestion added a check for
malloc return.
This seems like another occasion to use the weird
do { ... } while(0)
trick to make the macro behave more like a statement.
I might obfuscate the macro parameters to make collisions less
likely, e.g. e => N_C_RV_e
You want me to rename the macro parameter e to N_C_RV_e ? or something else
say ncrve to avoid collision ?
Kumar
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Kumar Srinivasan
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi,
Please review simple fixes for code correctness in the launcher.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ksrini/8013736/webrev.0/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eksrini/8013736/webrev.0/>
Thanks
Kumar
